In commercial as well as non-commercial grass cutting, in order to increase productivity, it is necessary to reduce the physical stress placed upon the mower operator. The less the physical demands of the task, the greater the area the mower operator can cover in a given time. Accordingly, lawn mowers have evolved from the early, rather strenuous to operate push type to the more relaxed, riding units of today.
However, the riding mowers commonly found today have drawbacks, particularly in commercial settings. They are typically large, mechanically complex and expensive.
Because of their size, they are difficult to transport and store, and are restricted in confined or highly contoured mowing areas. Their mechanical complexity tends to make them less reliable and more costly to repair and maintain. And, their high price can make them prohibitively expensive, particularly in commercial applications.
However, in the past, compromises between the cost and complexity of riding mowers and the physical demands of manual or power mowers have been proposed. Particularly, in U.S. Pat. No. 2,919,756 issued to E. A. Knipe January 1960, and U.S. Pat. No. 2,677,224 issued to H. J. Stegeman May 1954, it is suggested to couple a "sulky", upon which an operator can sit, to a self-propelled, power mower. This approach has the advantage of reducing the purchase price and complexity of the mower as compared with a riding mower, while relieving the operator of the burden of having to follow the mower around on foot during cutting as where a self-propelled mower were used alone.
But, as seen nn both the Knipe and Stegeman patents, the apparatus proposed still require relatively complicated mechanical arrangements to seat the operator, couple the sulky to the mower and provide drive power to the sulky wheels.